Definitely not the FXT90. Surprised you skipped Etys - I would say my ER4S properly inserted would be my pick.

Thanks I appreciate your time and advice.

Well, I have always got the impression that the ER4S were lacking in the lower frequencies, and technically speaking, wouldn't that be a coloring? Not how the original recording was intended to be heard and perceived?

I need an IEM that's accurate, being neutral, balanced, transparent, and without the treble peaks often associated with most analytical phones, therefore no false perception of detail. I'm very tempted to purchase the CK10 again, and simply EQ the treble spike out? Or possibly purchase the RE272?

Thanks Joker. I read your review of the HiSound Crystal and the SE215 and apparently they sound pretty much alike. And the price is similar too. To you, what are the main differences between them? I'm not looking for bass monsters, I like bass to be noticeable but without sacrificing detail and the highs and mids.

The treble - crystals have more of it & it's of better quality. Neither is a bass monster and neither has heavy bass bleed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drakokirby

I recently bought what I believe to be either Sunrise Xcape IE or the v.2 and i'm looking for something more balance, not like how it feels all warm and stuffy in its sound. Looking for an IEM that has the bass impact like them with clarity and good treble. A above-average or higher soundstage, vocals, and good separation of sounds are also high on the list. My max budget is about $100. Any recommendations?

I am not familiar with the Xcape v2. ECCI PR401 might suit you - it has good space, punchy bass, and plenty of treble sparkle compared to an Xcape IE or other warmer earphones. Otherwise you'd have to add $$ and go for a Sony EX600 or JVC FXT90.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Neverhood

Thanks I appreciate your time and advice.

Well, I have always got the impression that the ER4S were lacking in the lower frequencies, and technically speaking, wouldn't that be a coloring? Not how the original recording was intended to be heard and perceived?

I need an IEM that's accurate, being neutral, balanced, transparent, and without the treble peaks often associated with most analytical phones, therefore no false perception of detail. I'm very tempted to purchase the CK10 again, and simply EQ the treble spike out? Or possibly purchase the RE272?

A properly-fitted ER4S really isn't any more lacking at the bottom than a CK10, maybe slightly less depth but very close overall. Etys don't have good bass body, hence a reputation for being lean on bass, but if you're looking for a more neutral tone compared to the CK10s they would be it. From a response standpoint I am pretty sure they are flatter than EX1000s, RE262, and especially FXT90s. The RE272 is pretty lean on bass too - rolls off earlier than the ER4S and generally de-emphasizes low frequencies.

A properly-fitted ER4S really isn't any more lacking at the bottom than a CK10, maybe slightly less depth but very close overall. Etys don't have good bass body, hence a reputation for being lean on bass, but if you're looking for a more neutral tone compared to the CK10s they would be it. From a response standpoint I am pretty sure they are flatter than EX1000s, RE262, and especially FXT90s. The RE272 is pretty lean on bass too - rolls off earlier than the ER4S and generally de-emphasizes low frequencies.

I tried the triple flange tips, and were very uncomfortable, and instead used the Sony Hybrids.

What about the GR01 or GR07? They seem to be very neutral and balanced phones according to your review, how would they compare to the ER4S and CK10? Obviously the GR07 would be quite different, but not to the same degree with the GR01. The EX600 looks interesting, and apparently more balanced compared to the GR07 according to Inks.

Sorry for all the questions, I have had a very bad experience with sibilance on both the CK10 and RE0, which has subsequently caused myself to be very skeptical of analytical phones, hence the reason of choosing the RE262.

What exactly does treble sparkle mean? That it's clear and shines the brighest on the IEM?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljokerl

The treble - crystals have more of it & it's of better quality. Neither is a bass monster and neither has heavy bass bleed.

I am not familiar with the Xcape v2. ECCI PR401 might suit you - it has good space, punchy bass, and plenty of treble sparkle compared to an Xcape IE or other warmer earphones. Otherwise you'd have to add $$ and go for a Sony EX600 or JVC FXT90.

A properly-fitted ER4S really isn't any more lacking at the bottom than a CK10, maybe slightly less depth but very close overall. Etys don't have good bass body, hence a reputation for being lean on bass, but if you're looking for a more neutral tone compared to the CK10s they would be it. From a response standpoint I am pretty sure they are flatter than EX1000s, RE262, and especially FXT90s. The RE272 is pretty lean on bass too - rolls off earlier than the ER4S and generally de-emphasizes low frequencies.

I tried the triple flange tips, and were very uncomfortable, and instead used the Sony Hybrids.

What about the GR01 or GR07? They seem to be very neutral and balanced phones according to your review, how would they compare to the ER4S and CK10? Obviously the GR07 would be quite different, but not to the same degree with the GR01. The EX600 looks interesting, and apparently more balanced compared to the GR07 according to Inks.

Sorry for all the questions, I have had a very bad experience with sibilance on both the CK10 and RE0, which has subsequently caused myself to be very skeptical of analytical phones, hence the reason of choosing the RE262.

They are but you asked for my one pick and the ER4S would be it, I think. The GR01 is close but comparing it to the ER4S I still think the ER4S is a bit more flatter through the midrange.

That said, I don't think the RE0 is sibilant at all so I am not sure if there is some auxiliary issue with treble-prominent earphones in your particular case. I've certainly had worse sibilance accentuation out of the GR07 and GR01 than the RE0.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drakokirby

What exactly does treble sparkle mean? That it's clear and shines the brighest on the IEM?

It's not necessarily a measure of overall balance (i.e. something could be bass-heavy and still have sparkle -FX700 for example) but rather how prominent the treble is. The opposite would be a dull-sounding earphone like the Dunu Crater or Paradigm E3m, which push treble into the background and severely reduce the energy of certain instruments.

How would you compare between Fischer audio DBA mk-2, Sony MDR EX-600, vsonics GR07 and JVC ha ext 90? I see them with similar sound ratings and around the 100-200 price range? Also individually their sound signature and more on the bass thanks I like the bass in my music

Accessories (3.5/5) - Single-flange silicone tips (5 sizes), comply foam tips, shirt clip, and plastic clamshell carrying case
Build Quality (3/5) - As with most of UE's recent releases, the lightweight housings of the UE500 are made mostly of chromed plastic. The flat cable is soft and flexible but could really use better strain reliefs on housing entry and the 3.5mm L-plug. The paint on the housings rubs off over time
Isolation (4/5) - Very good for a dynamic-driver earphone
Microphonics (4/5) - Reasonably low in the soft and flexible flat cable. Can be reduced further with over-the-ear wear
Comfort (4/5) - The housings are small and lightweight, tapering slightly at the rear. The nozzles are reasonably long and angled slightly for comfort. The flat cord can make over-the-ear wear slightly more troublesome but with the cable cinch it is still very much possible

Sound (7.4/10) - In stark contrast to the UE350 and UE600 models, the signature of the UE500 is very mildly v-shaped, with punchy bass and crisp, sparkly treble attracting the most attention. The low end of the UE500 is weaker than that of the UE350 but unlike the cheaper model, which is bassy all the time, the 500 can be impactful when it needs to be and balanced when it doesn't. The bass is reasonably well-extended and has good impact for an earphone that can still be called balanced on the whole. It is not the tightest or quickest and there is slight mid-bass emphasis, giving the sound a very small amount of warmth and slight fullness compared to sets such as the RE-ZERO, but no discernible bloat or bleed. Those seeking Klipsch S4 or Beats by Dre-like bass power will want to look elsewhere.

The midrange is slightly laid back and possesses good detail and clarity. Compared to the UE350, the UE500 sounds significantly cleaner, though it trades off some of the fullness and forwardness of the cheaper model. The top end is crisp and sparkly and the earphones would sound slightly bright overall if not for the mid-bass emphasis. Top-end extension is good but those who prefer laid-back treble might find the UE500 just a bit too energetic. The overall balance reminds me of the Sunrise Xcited - both earphones are spacious and reasonably balanced, with the Xcited being slightly clearer and more detailed but also brighter, edgier, and more aggressive. The UE500, on the other hand, offers more impact and a smoother sound.

The presentation of the UE500 is spacious and airy. The sonic space is wider than it is deep or tall - not as well-rounded as something like the Sunrise Xcape IE or MEElec CC51. As a result, the UE500 has a bit of a tough time portraying intimacy compared even to the Sunrise Xcited, which has a similarly wide presentation, but is still very enjoyable overall. Instrument separation and overall resolution trail the Xcited slightly but the dynamics of the UEs are good and the layering is a touch more convincing than with the older BA-based SuperFi 4. One thing that surprised me knowing that the UE500 is a consumer-oriented earphone is the relatively low sensitivity - there will undoubtedly be complaints of low volume in the general populace, though the UE500 is still plenty loud next to the Phonak 012.

Value (8.5/10) - The UE500 differs both from UE’s lower-end dynamic-driver models and the old armature-based SuperFi line in offering a mildly v-shaped signature with impactful bass and sparkly treble. Thanks to its clean and detailed sound, it competes well with Head-Fi's favorite mid-range IEMs, which is in itself is impressive for an earphone so readily available to the general public. The flat cable is rather poorly relieved for my liking and the frustrating plastic carrying case puts style above convenience but neither of these will stop me from recommending the UE500.

Accessories (3.5/5) - Single-flange silicone tips (3 sizes) and faux leather clamshell carrying case
Build Quality (4/5) - The E3m is built around a single piece of machined aluminum housing the driver chamber. A second, plastic piece flares outward at the rear and presents a rather large Paradigm Shift logo. The nozzle is protected by a metal filter and the entire construction feels nice and solid. The cabling is nylon-sheathed but seems to resist kinks and tangles very well. The biggest issue is the lack of strain relief on housing entry and at the y-split, which may result in the nylon cable sheath fraying over time. A mic/remote unit with an unusually small single button is located on the right-side cable.
Isolation (3.5/5) - Good for a dynamic-driver earphone
Microphonics (4/5) - Mild when worn cord-down and pretty much nonexistent with over-the-ear wear
Comfort (3.5/5) - The housings use an ergonomic, off-axis design (a-la AKG K3003) and the stock tips are of good quality and easy to get a good seal with. The E3m can be worn both cable-up and cable-down but the sharp rear corners of the housing and stem tend to contact the outer ear, potentially causing discomfort for some users. This is easily remedied by using longer aftermarket eartips that position the housings farther out in the ear

Sound (6.9/10) - The general sound signature of the Paradigm Shift E3m is bass-biased, with a laid-back midrange and similarly relaxed treble. The low end is full and deep, easily reaching down into the subbass frequencies and offering great rumble and impact. Paradigm claims that the tuning of the E3m was inspired by their Signature Series loudspeakers, and it is easy to imagine speakers putting out the same sort of powerful, visceral bass the earphones produce. Relative to the midrange and treble, the quantity of the bass borders on ‘basshead’ and despite the lack of mid-bass bloat lacks a little texture, speed, and resolution, sounding boomy at times. For comparison purposes I grabbed another in-ear headset recently released by a different speaker manufacturer – the Velodyne vPulse. While the bass of the Velodynes did not have quite as much impact, it was pleasantly cleaner and more controlled, resulting in a more accurate, less colored overall sound.

The midrange of the E3m – and pretty much everything following – is recessed compared to the prominent bass. Though there is not much of a mid-bass hump per se, the bass level is so inflated that the low end bleeds into the midrange anyway, resulting in noticeable veiling of vocals and instruments and a lack of clarity compared to many cheaper in-ears. Bumping everything above 200 Hz up on the EQ helps, allowing the mids to shine - with the bass out of the way detail and texture levels are actually quite good and the earphones sound enjoyable. Notes have good weight and thickness, giving the E3m a full-bodied feel that works well with the warm tone.

The treble transition is smooth and uneventful. The top end is just as laid-back as the midrange, with the resulting ‘dull’ sound reminding me of the new Dunu Crater and Hawkeye. There is no treble sparkle and crispness is mediocre at best. On the upside, top-end extension is decent and the E3m adds no harshness or sibilance into the mix. The sound remains smooth and non-fatiguing, even at higher volumes, but the dullness does make cranking up the volume tempting. A more accurate set - a VSonic GR06, for example - will extract the same amount of musical detail at lower volumes and may even encourage some listeners to turn down their devices.

The presentation of the E3m is probably its best trait – it is wholesome and well-rounded. The soundstage is above-average in size and has very good on-center feel compared to sets like the Velodyne vPulse. While the bass tends to dominate the sonic space when present, the E3m doesn’t sound particularly congested and has good instrument separation and layering. In comparison, the Dunu Hawkeye and Velodyne vPulse both sound flat and a bit uninvolving. Dynamics are quite decent as well – closer to the mid-fi level of a MEElec CC51 or Shure SE215 than the Velodyne or Dunu sets.

Value (6.5/10) - Paradigm’s flagship in-ear is less of a shift and more of a paradox, promising sound akin to high-end speakers but delivering a bass-heavy signature saddled with veiled vocals and dull treble. The drivers are certainly very capable, producing high detail levels, good dynamics, and a spacious presentation, and the E3m is a solid headset – well-built, comfortable, and low on cable noise. As it stands, however, the balance makes it one to recommend only for lovers of warm, full-bodied sound with forward bass and recessed mids and highs.

How would you compare between Fischer audio DBA mk-2, Sony MDR EX-600, vsonics GR07 and JVC ha ext 90? I see them with similar sound ratings and around the 100-200 price range? Also individually their sound signature and more on the bass thanks I like the bass in my music

Similar sound ratings but different signatures - I really don't think the DBA-02 will work for you. The FXT90 is easily the safest choice IMO.